By Marta Núñez

Translated by Claire Thompson

 

When the relationship between father and mother break down and family courts are involved, a nightmarish situation may start for mothers. The use in family courts of the controversial Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) against mothers may result in an abusive father continuing to put mothers and children at great risk. Thanks to the courage of some women speaking for themselves about their predicaments, society is getting to know more about their cases. In this blog, we look at what SAP is and interview Irune Costumero, who has become an iconic figure in women’s fight against ‘parental alienation syndrome’ in Spain and Latin America.

Irune Costumero is from Vizcaya, Spain. She is a philologist, a linguist, a teacher, a feminist, and today a specialist in the false PAS.  Irune’s case caught the attention of the UN’s Special Envoy for Women. In a damning letter to the Spanish State, it has demanded an explanation from the Spanish Government for the use of the non-existent ‘Parental Alienation’ syndrome in her case.

The case initiated by Irune against Council of Vizcaya’s Children’s Service’s officials is going through hearings (these began on June 6, Bilbao) and is receiving remarkable attention from the media.

 What is the Parental Alienation Syndrome?

Richard A. Gardner, M.D., was the creator and main proponent for Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) theory. Prior to his suicide, Gardner was an unpaid part-time clinical professor of child psychiatry at the College of Physicians and Surgeons at Columbia University. He made his money mainly as a forensic expert. 

Gardner developed PAS in 1985 based on his personal observations and work as an expert witness, often on behalf of fathers accused of molesting their children. Gardner asserted that PAS is very common and he saw manifestations of this syndrome in over 90% of the custody conflicts he evaluated--even when abuse allegations are not raised (Gardner, 1987, p. 67). Gardner (September 6, 1993) claimed that PAS is "a disorder of children, arising almost exclusively in child-custody disputes, in which one parent (usually the mother) programs the child to hate the other parent (usually the father)." (www.leadershipcouncil.org)

Gardner 's theory of PAS has had a profound effect on how the court systems in many countries handle allegations of child sexual abuse, especially during divorce. Gardner authored more than 250 books and articles with advice directed towards mental health professionals, the legal community, divorcing adults and their children. Gardner 's private publishing company, Creative Therapeutics, published his many books, cassettes, and videotapes. Information available on Gardner 's website indicates that he has been certified to testify as an expert in approximately 400 cases, both criminal and civil, in more than 25 American states” (www.leadershipcouncil.org)

Although his PAS theory has been discredited by the medical community because it has never been validated by empirical research, it continues to have credibility in the family law system of many countries and it is used against mothers, to invalidate reservations that mothers have against violent or abusive fathers. This way women are “pathologized” as sufferers of a “syndrome” and deprived of her children’s custody.

Sonia Vaccaro, clinical and forensic psychologist, who has researched PAS in Latin America and Spain, considers that PAS is a “misogynous construct” very much connected with the still very patriarchal family law system that favour the power of the Pater Familiae.  (Vaccaro,S. Síndrome de Alienación Parental,2019/www.soniavaccaro.com)

And it is not only mothers who are suffering, as there are many disturbing examples where domestic and child abuse were dismissed by allegations of PAS against the non-abusive parents.

Women’s Aid published in its extensive research on the topic that “one of the most extreme examples of the way that gendered attitudes, myths and perceptions can block safe child contact and the realisation of survivors’ and their children’s human rights is the use of accusations of parental alienation against women who raise concerns about domestic abuse. The testimonies of women in our sample revealed disturbing examples where domestic abuse and child abuse were obscured by allegations of parental alienation against the non-abusive parent.” (Birchal,J and Choudhry,S (2018)”What about my right not to be abused? Domestic abuse, human rights and the family courts, Bristol: Women’s Aid)

  

Interview with Irune Costumero

 

Marta Núñez(FILIA): It seems from what I’ve read about your case that your problems started after your conflictive divorce in 2013. What was the agreement reached regarding your daughter’s custody? 

Irune Costumero: Yes. In 2013, I reported my daughter’s father for abuse, yet despite the prosecutor sentencing him to more than a year in prison and granting a restraining order, a (female) judge let him off. 

When there’s abuse involved, I think it’s a mistake to call a divorce ‘conflictive’. My daughter’s father and his parents took advantage and kidnapped my daughter. They kept her hidden, whereabouts unknown, for two months, during which time I had no idea whether she was dead or alive. 

During this period, another judge (also female) awarded weekly shared custody. My daughter was just 23 months old. 

MN: When and how did they snatch your daughter? And what reasons did they give? 

IC: The second time they ripped my daughter away from me was on August 4, 2017. The Diputación Foral de Bizkaia is the local council for the area in Spain that the English would call Vizcaya, part of the Basque Country in Northern Spain. Their Children’s Services ignored the fact that my daughter rejected her father, ignored three hospital reports showing her father’s mistreatment of her, and further ignored a child psychologist’s report showing that she had separation anxiety when away from me, her mother. 

The main aim of the Diputación was to bond her with her father, in spite of the profound anxiety she was experiencing. She lost control and soiled herself both inside and outside of the encounter, in the presence of the Children’s Services’ workers. 

Despite this, and with no prior warning, a woman (who I discovered later was a social worker), accompanied by both a police escort and more than ten Diputación workers, came for my five-year-old girl. They tore her away, ignoring her distress and cries for help.  While this was happening, I was being read a Council Order denying me any contact with her for a whole month. Hearing her screaming, calling me, I ran from the room to help her, but a police officer restrained me, preventing me from going after my child.  It was to be five months before I saw her again. 

The reason they gave? I had allegedly ‘weaponised’ her as part of our parental conflict: ‘Parental Alienation Syndrome’, according to a document created by the Diputación’s psychologist. 

MN: How have you addressed the situation? Have you appealed? What’s been happening over the years?  

IC: I used the civil courts to fight the Council Order, along with a formal complaint through the criminal system. A Provisional Hearing in Vizcaya has charged them, at least three times, at the most senior level, with prevarication, and the mistreatment and psychological abuse of both me and my daughter. 

The court awarded a sentence of five years, six months and two days in jail, 15 years disqualification, and they’ve had to pay a bond of 600 thousand euros. 

We’ve had no civil actions in almost four years. The last case was clearly prejudiced, so further civil action was pretty much paralysed, giving way to the criminal action which is usually faster, except in my case, which is, effectively, David versus Goliath. A hearing was opened a year and a half ago, but we’ve still seen no judgement. 

I went to meet the President of the UN Children’s Rights, in a Tuesday to Friday visit to Uruguay to explain the situation and how my daughter still lives under the shadow of this non-existent ‘syndrome’. I’ve also met with all the Parliamentary reps in the Basque Parliament; with Deputies (MPs) in National Congress; with the Spanish Government’s Representative against Gender Violence…

Meanwhile, in order to rescue my daughter from this rat hole, in September 2019 we presented an Article 58 Urgent Precautionary Measure to the Family Courts. Urgent measure? A year and two months later we received a judgement – from the same female judge as before. 

Because of this, I sent a formal complaint to the UN’s Special Envoy for Women. In a damning letter to the Spanish State, they have demanded an explanation from the Spanish Government for the use of the non-existent ‘Parental Alienation’ syndrome in my case. 

Despite all of this, the judge in Bilbao’s Family Court No 6 refused me shared custody, which procedurally was all we were entitled to request due to the previous judgement. The judge awarded exclusive custody to the father, giving me every other weekend and half of the holidays. 

MN: I understand that the UN has asked the Spanish State to explain its use of Parental Alienation Syndrome, as there was a previous case in 2014. What results has UN’s intervention had? 

IC: As I explained, despite a good few prods by the UN Envoy regarding the (mis)use of Parental Alienation Syndrome in my case, my daughter and I have remained separated for four years. My daughter is growing up away from her home, away from her maternal family, all of whom love her and who have always treated her with both affection and respect. 

MN: Your case has received a lot of publicity in Spain. There were protests, weren’t there? And that’s to say nothing of activity on social media. How’s your community responded to this? 

IC: True, the news has been echoed by the media both in Spain and abroad.  In Igorre, where I both live and work, there was a demonstration of support, but even so, Goliath’s not going to have his arm twisted by us!  

Instead of thinking about the best interests of a child, they’re thinking about the court action on the horizon, closing in on them fast – condemning a little girl to an abyss of suffering. 

MN: How do you see the future. What’s your legal team’s advice? 

IC: I’m hopeful for the future.  

As a mother, I cannot understand the gratuitous, unnecessary suffering of a little girl who’s been separated from her mother for five years. 

It’s torture to live like this. My daughter’s not doing well. She wants to live with me, her mother, but no-one’s stepping up to help her. 

This kind of barbarity is hard to process. For a little girl of nine, it’s even more difficult. She’s spent four years begging to come home to live with her mother, but is being forced to live with people who she doesn’t love and who fail to treat her the way they should.

MN: As a UK based feminist organisation, what can FILIA do to help your case? 

IC:Every little bit of help counts when it comes to publicising this institutionalised torture. 

People need to know what’s happening to our children using this non-existent ‘Parental Alienation Syndrome’. 

Politicians should be putting their heads in their hands. They need to reverse this situation, and allow my daughter back to live with me. I’m her mother, and they should never have torn her away from me. 

MN: Thank you Irune. We are fully supporting your case and the campaign that you are leading to make visible this injustice.

 

#NosotrasConIruneCostumero

#TodasSomosIrune

#NofSAP

#StopViolenciaInstitucional

#IruneCostumeroHaciendoHistoria

@irunecostumero